Category Archives: Trends

Reverse Innovation — Hashtags of the Week (HOTW): (Week of March 31, 2014)

Ethnic Box

Reverse innovation is a concept I’ve been tracking closely recently, and which is critical in global health. The idea, in health anyway, is that we have as much to learn from developing nations as they have to learn from us. I heard a story of a visiting faculty member here from Ghana who saved a baby’s life because he knew how to manually reposition babies in the womb during delivery when there isn’t enough time to get the machines that are sometimes used here for the same purpose. That’s just one small, local example. Last week’s Twitter chat on reverse innovation brought up several others. You can find the complete chat and cited articles in this Storify:

Do low-income countries hold the key to health innovation?: https://storify.com/pfanderson/do-low-income-countries-hold-the-key-to-health-inn

Here are a few selected tweets from the chat.


First posted at THL Blog: http://wp.me/p1v84h-1UN

On My Radar: “Reverse Innovation”

Ethnic Box

“Reverse Innovation” is a concept that came across my horizon a few months ago, and for which I immediately went into high alert. This is important. I want to push today’s Twitter chat on this topic, so I’m going to keep this post very short, and hope to come back to this more soon.

Briefly, then. What first brought this to my attention was a blogpost at Biomed Central which was closely followed by an article in Smart Planet.

Reverse Innovation in Global Health Systems: Building the Global Knowledge Pool http://blogs.biomedcentral.com/bmcblog/2013/04/12/reverse-innovation-in-global-health-systems-building-the-global-knowledge-pool/

Dehydration cure from developing countries comes to U.S. hospitals http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/bulletin/dehydration-cure-from-developing-countries-comes-to-us-hospitals/27991

The basic idea of “reverse innovation” is this, as expressed through my ill-informed novice point of view. The past century or two have largely seen scitech and research and cultural innovation flow from the first world countries to the third world countries. This has resulted in unrealistic expectations and unsustainable processes which are making life harder for all of us, everywhere across the planet. In the interests of increased sustainability and the desire to create innovation that will integrate more efficiently with the broader systems of the planet, the idea is that problem-solving partnerships between first world and third world researchers can result in innovations that are both effective and sustainable, with the innovations flowing from the third world countries to the first world, thus reversing what has been the recent pattern.

You can discover more information about reverse innovation through these resources.

JOURNAL:
Globalization and health: http://www.globalizationandhealth.com/

KEY ARTICLE:
Developed-developing country partnerships: Benefits to developed countries? http://www.globalizationandhealth.com/content/8/1/17

SOUNDBITE:

“Developing countries can generate effective solutions for today’s global health challenges.”

SPECIAL ISSUE / ARTICLE COLLECTION:
Reverse innovation in global health systems: learning from low-income countries http://www.globalizationandhealth.com/series/reverse_innovations

HASHTAGS:
– Primary
#revsinv
#reverseinnovation
– Other
#revinno
#revinnov
#innoverse

Every Day In Many Ways: Solving “Wicked Problems” at the University of Michigan

Horizon Report 2014 Trends & Challenges
Horizon Report 2014: http://www.nmc.org/publications/2014-horizon-report-higher-ed

The past couple months, the Cool Toys Conversations group has been discussing the Horizon Report, as we do every year. This year we decided the collection of technologies was perhaps not as interesting as the trends and challenges they identified (screenshot above).

Yesterday, over the lunch hour, the group became particularly interested in the wicked problem of “Keeping Education Relevant.” There was a lot of good conversation, and I unfortunately did not take notes, so I am going to trust my memory (HAH!). The gist of it was encapsulated in a couple points. David Crandall pointed out that there is a strong relationship between the so-called solvable challenges and the so-called wicked (or unsolvable) challenges, with the hint that perhaps solving the solvable challenges might actually take us a long way towards solving the unsolvable challenges. (Yes, it’s ok to giggle – that’s a lot of the same word.)

Next was the observation that “Keeping Education Relevant” is distinct from keeping learning relevant, since learning is ALWAYS relevant. So the question is less about how to keep learning relevant, but more about how to position the kind of education that happens in higher education as an active participant in the broad open amorphous space that is comprised of all those glorious online and offline social learning spaces that people love so much.

Last but not least was the interjection that, Hello! Maybe it isn’t so unsolvable after all, since so many folk here are already doing such exciting things to position us, as academics, in ways to show relevance to the public and to engage with the public. Actually, I suspect that all major universities are engaged in similar kinds of activities, and working hard to make clear the ways in which academia is not only relevant, but makes possible research and learning opportunities that benefit the broader communities and which would not be possible or practical in other types of spaces and structures.

Here are just a very FEW examples of activities around campus that are, frankly, not atypical and which illustrate ways in which we are making academia relevant here, every day, as a routine part of business.

UMSI MAKERFEST

#UMSIMakerfest !!! | #UMSIMakerfest !!!
#UMSIMakerfest !!! | #UMSIMakerfest !!!

Today, the School of Information had a Makerfest in the Union. As you can see from the poster, they had a lot of cool stuff going on, from Google Glass and Rasperry Pi to video games and cookies. Among their partners for this event were multiple community makerspaces, both the campus and local public library, individuals with special talents or resources, and of course, campus groups. Was the audience just college students? No way! Students were there, but also parents and kids, teachers, staff, community, and I don’t know who else.

#UMSIMakerfest: https://www.flickr.com/photos/rosefirerising/sets/72157642967068393

TEDXUOFM

DSC_0149 | IMG_6735
3O5A9174_Kimwall | TEDxUofM
IMG_5416 | eak.FEA.TEDxUofM.4-8-11.044.

A couple weeks ago (less, actually), the campus had our TEDx event (TEDxUofM). TEDx events are gatherings of fascinating people sharing innovative and creative ideas. They are spinoffs from the large TED organization where TED stands for Technology Entertainment and Design. My brain keeps trying to change the “E” to “Education”, since that’s what my brain associates with the TED videos, but when you think about it, “Education” and “Entertainment” are pretty closely related in many important ways.

With our local TEDxUofM event, it ALWAYS is highlighting topics that connect academia and the real world, projects that make a difference in the lives of real people, stories that touch hearts and lives. It doesn’t accomplish this by just making a forum for faculty to preach to the choir, but by giving prominence to projects by students and alumni as well, and by getting faculty to talk about their passions beyond their official job duties. In this sense it is like most other TED and TEDx events. Here, of course, the event connects the campus and the town and community. There isn’t just one TEDx event locally, but several — TEDxDetroit, TEDxUofM, TEDxEMU, TEDxSkylineHS, TEDxArb, TEDxYouth@AnnArbor, TEDxUMDearborn, and probably more I haven’t covered/discovered. TEDx events are partnerships with the community, ways to bring information out of ivory towers and into public spaces. They engage, emote, intrigue, and inspire. They foster awareness, and through awareness future collaborations.

RISK BITES

In Andrew Maynard’s recent presentation, “Should Academics Get Down and Dirty with Youtube?,” he illustrated the power of Youtube to reach the public, to educate, to inform, and to potentially inform policy and decisionmakers. This insight of his was reinforced by President Obama’s recruitment of video bloggers (vloggers) with strong reach among the youth audience in order to disseminate critical information about the Obamacare registration deadlines.

Andrew highlighted a number of influential vloggers who present content on science and research, but who are not themselves from academia, then asking what is it that they are doing that we are not? Why is it that the general public obviously have a passion for information about science, but find science information more persuasive when presented by someone who is not a scientist? What are we not doing that we should be or could be doing? These questions are what inspired him to create the Risk Bites series of science videos, in which he endeavors to position academic and heavily evidence-based science information in a public space in a way that will hopefully reach those who need the information. Here is the most recent video from that series as an example.


What’s the difference between hazard and risk? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GwVTdsnN1E

ROAD SCHOLARS

Goodwill-Industries | Chateau-Chantal
Cascade-Engineering | Discussion-with-legislators

The University of Michigan Road Scholars program has been going on for DECADES. The idea was, yet again, how to make academia relevant to the communities in which we find ourselves. More than that, it was how to create bridges, connections, and partnerships between the University and the people of our state. In the Road Scholars program, faculty travel the state on a kind of pilgrimage to various communities around Michigan, developing a genuine and personal connection to the people and places, learning about the initiatives and work that is done around the state, and fostering opportunities for outreach, partnerships, mutual regard and learning.

GHANA EMERGENCY MEDICINE COLLABORATIVE
D80_35
Ghana-Michigan Conference Nov 2009 023 | Ghana-Michigan Conference Nov 2009 024
D80_30

The Ghana Emergency Medicine Collaborative is another project that has been going on for a while. These images are from an early event in 2009 which laid some of the groundwork for this collaboration between the University and medical programs in Ghana. The collaboration involves individuals from both schools going to the other country to learn more about needs, resources, and opportunities. This innovative partnership drove much of the initial development of the University’s creation of open education resources, and has proven to have a large and lasting impact far beyond the original scope of the project.

CLOSING THOUGHTS

Are you here at the University of Michigan? Are you interested in a campus-wide conversation about barriers to innovation in education and what we are already doing to solve these problems? Do you know of some amazing work people are doing to help keep us relevant? Please add your thoughts in the comments.

The Future of Genomic Medicine #FOGM14 — Hashtags of the Week (HOTW): (Week of March 21, 2014)

Lantern Slides: Heritance of Clefting

The image above is from one of the earliest studies on the genetics of clefting done here at the University of Michigan School of Dentistry. Those were the days, weren’t they? You had to track signs and symptoms across generations, for decades, trying to deduce large scale patterns. Now we spit in a tube and mail it off.

Pic of the Day - PGen

The Future of Genomic Medicine was just happening. It was being actively tweeted by a number of leading figures in healthcare and science — Eric Topol, Carl Zimmer, Dr. Khoury from the CDC, Magdalene Skipper from Nature, and (uh) Al Gore, just for starters. It was so active that the original hashtag, #FOGM14, had to be dropped because of spammers, and they group switched to #FOGM2014. It was so active that even though it happened two weeks ago, the hashtags are still active on Twitter with people continuing the conversations around the conference. Here are just a highly selected few tweets with interesting thoughts, resources, and take-aways from this important conference.


First posted at THL Blog: http://thlibrary.wordpress.com/2014/03/24/the-future-of-genomic-medicine-fogm14-hashtags-of-the-week-hotw-week-of-march-21-2014/

Tracking the Trends: Emerging Technologies 2014

Emerging Technology Trends 2014

I’ve been working on this for a while. What you see above is my very first infographic, which I eventually made at Venngage.

E-Tech Trends 2014 [Infographic]: https://infograph.venngage.com/infograph/publish/b097d0b8-8d2f-4ca5-a339-f6ede2bdf8c7

The only problem was that Venngage wouldn’t allow me to export a copy of my work unless I pay them money, and since I don’t have moola to spare you get the low-resolution hard-to-read copy above unless you go to the Venngage site.

BACKGROUND

Briefly, to make this, I took a batch of my favorite white papers, annual reports, and similar resources that choose the most important new tech for various fields. I compiled their lists, and looked for overlaps to identify what seems to be most important across all of them.

WHAT I FOUND

Of the ten reports I examined, there were never more than 5 in agreement on any one technology, and over half of all the technologies are listed in only one of the reports. Of course, that’s the part that is most interesting to me, but that isn’t what will be most important to my bosses. So here are the levels of agreement, as reflected in the infographic.

5 of 10

3d printing
learning analytics

4 of 10

Additive manufacturing
Big data
Flipped classroom
Games & gamification
Social media
Virtual reality
Wearable technology

3 of 10

Artificial intelligence
Mobile learning
Personal agency (learners, patients)
Personal genomics
Social networks

2 of 10

3d bioprinting
Affective computing
Augmented reality
Biometric authentication
Bitcoins & digital currency
Brain-computer interfaces (BCI)
Cloud computing
Drones
Global collaboration
Holographic displays & inputs
Human augmentation
Internet of things (IOT)
Maker culture / makerspaces / consumer to creator
Mobile health monitoring
MOOCs
Newborn genome
Open content
Personal learning networks
Power, renewable
Quantified self
Quantum computing
Robotics
Sensors
Smartwatches
Speech recognition
Speech-speech translation
Virtual assistants
Volumetric Displays
Wearable user interfaces

HOW I DID THIS

I follow a LOT of blogs, Twitter streams, journals, databases, archives, etc. to scan for emerging technologies. My brain sorts these into various categories, informally noted for what level of awareness I feel they need and who I should tell about them, and whether I should tell folk now or if it can wait a while. But that’s all fairly soft and ill-defined. I had a question recently for which I wanted more of a crisp idea of what are the most strategically important emerging technologies.

I could immediately suggest several thinktanks, organizations, and thought leaders who track emerging technologies and push out their annual list of what’s most important. I’m not one of those people, but I watch them. For this question, no one of those reports had what I wanted. I needed education, sci-tech, and healthcare. I wanted to be able to pluck the best from across several reports, and I wanted to be able to do this in a way that went beyond “because I feel it in my gut.”

I made a spreadsheet, entered the technologies mentioned in each report, and checked off which ones appeared in which reports, tallied them up, and this gave me what I put into the infographic. Below, you can find a list of the ten sources I used, and all of the technologies listed that appeared in more than one report.

There are several Horizon Reports, of which more than one might be of interest. Here I used the main Higher Ed report and the Australian report for “tertiary education” (which is basically also higher ed). As a side comment, even though I didn’t use the Horizon Project K-12 education report I often find that the real bleeding edge of tech adoption in education is there, in grade schools. Worth checking out.

There is another fascinating parallel resource to the Horizon Report from Australia (CORE-Ed). And of course, the Gartner Hype Cycle is a must, even though it isn’t education specific, as is the MIT Tech Review’s list of “breakthrough technologies.” The SETDA report for 2013 isn’t out yet, but the 2012 one might still be of interest. Audrey Watters did a rather interesting series in her Hack Education blog on her selections for the top ten edtech trends of 2013. She includes so many use cases and examples in her blog that it is a goldmine of resources to dig through. Berci Mesko’s white paper on the future of medicine is a similar rich resource that points to far far more than is mentioned at the top level.

SOURCES

Here are the links, in alphabetical order.

1. CORE-Ed: http://www.core-ed.org/thought-leadership/ten-trends

2. CORE-Ed Science: http://blog.core-ed.org/blog/2014/02/digital-technologies-and-the-future-of-science-education.html

3. Gartner Report, Hype Cycle: http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2575515

4. Guide to the Future of Medicine: http://scienceroll.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/the-guide-to-the-future-of-medicine-white-paper.pdf

5. Hack Education: Top Ed-Tech Trends of 2013: http://hackeducation.com/blog/tag.php?Search_Tag=ed-tech%20trends%202013

6. Horizon Project: Australian Tertiary Education: http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2013-Technology-Outlook-for-Australian-Tertiary-Education.pdf

7. Horizon Report: http://www.nmc.org/publications/2014-horizon-report-higher-ed

8. MIT Technology Review: 10 Breakthrough Technologies 2013: http://www.technologyreview.com/lists/breakthrough-technologies/2013/

9. Popular Science: 2014: The Year in Science: http://www.popsci.com/article/science/year-science-2014

10. SEDTA National Educational Technology Trends 2012: http://www.setda.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/SETDANational_Trends_2012_June20_Final.pdf

More on Obamacare & Youth


PBS: Conversation: “Health Care Reform,” The Comic Book: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sy-FQcXe1Lk

After yesterday’s post about the Obamacare Vloggers, I thought, “OMG, I wasn’t thinking about MY kid and Obamacare! He’s over 18. Is HE supposed to be registering?” You see, I just assumed that because he is on my own health insurance that it’s not relevant to him. But is it? There is a lot in the news right now about Obamacare (Accountable Care Act) and youth, but it is pretty confusing and contradictory. The video at the head of the post is about a graphic novel by Jonathan Gruber that attempts to make it clear.

Book cover

Gruber’s graphic novel / comic book about Obamacare.

Gruber’s graphic novel is available on campus through the libraries, if you wish to see a copy before deciding to buy, as well as at the local public library.

Health care reform : what it is, why it’s necessary, how it works / Jonathan Gruber, with HP Newquist ; illustrated by Nathan Schreiber. At UM: http://mirlyn.lib.umich.edu/Record/011279722 At AADL: http://www.aadl.org/catalog/record/1400708

I’m guessing there are probably also copies in local bookstores.

So, all this confusing information out there. What kind of conversation is it? There are a lot of people saying the ACA is bad for youth, is good for youth, and so forth. It’s interesting that Forbes has pieces on both sides of the debate, making it even less simple to decide. Of course, a lot of analysts are interested in the WHY of the dynamic. For me, being an economics ignoramus, the most persuasive and relevant information was in the graphic novel and my favorite infographic on the topic (not sure what that says about me!).

Infographic: How the Affordable Care Act Affects Young Adults

“There’s a scare campaign underway to make young adults worried about their health care costs.”

“The big question for young people is, ‘should I buy health insurance?’ If you have coverage either through work, the government, private insurance or are under 27 and covered under your parents policy, then you don’t need to buy health insurance.” How the Affordable Care Act Affects Young Adults http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-young-adults.php

Luckily there are also some resources along the lines of Healthcare Insurance 101. Obviously, you’ll want to make your own decision, but here are some of the links I’ve been looking at while exploring this question.

OBAMACARE GOOD FOR YOUTH

Ezra Klein. Why Obamacare is good for young people. Washington Post August 19, 2013 at 11:06 am. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/08/19/why-obamacare-is-good-for-young-people/?clsrd

Anne Johnson. Obamacare Will Save Young Americans Money — Pure and Simple. Policy Mic October 7, 2013. http://www.policymic.com/articles/66661/obamacare-will-save-young-americans-money-pure-and-simple

Todd Essig. Let’s Get Personal: Obamacare Really Is Good For The Young And Healthy. Forbes 9/29/2013 @ 12:45PM. http://www.forbes.com/sites/toddessig/2013/09/29/lets-get-personal-obamacare-really-is-good-for-the-young-and-healthy/

OBAMACARE BAD FOR YOUTH

Napala Pratini. 4 Reasons That Young Adults Won’t Sign Up for the Affordable Care Act. NerdWallet March 1, 2014.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/top-reasons-young-adults-sign-affordable-care-act/story?id=22690267

Chris Conover. No, Obamacare Is Not A Good Deal For Young People In The Long Run, Not Even Close. Forbes 8/23/2013 @ 6:00AM. http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/08/23/no-obamacare-is-not-a-good-deal-for-young-people-in-the-long-run-not-even-close/

Rituparna Basu. Obamacare Is Really, Really Bad For You, Especially If You’re Young. Frobes 8/21/2013 @ 8:00AM. http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/08/21/obamacare-is-really-really-bad-for-you-especially-if-youre-young/

OVERVIEW SOURCES

Christian Science Monitor (CSM) has a really useful set of articles on “Obamacare 101.” My favorite parts are for college students, those who already have insurance, and those who don’t want insurance. Policy Mic also has an overview, although not was well structured and robust as the CSM one.

Obamacare 101: What to know if you already have health insurance: http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/2013/0930/Obamacare-101-What-to-know-if-you-already-have-health-insurance

Obamacare 101: What college students need to know: http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/2013/1002/Obamacare-101-What-college-students-need-to-know

Obamacare 101: What to know if you opt out of buying health insurance: http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/2013/1001/Obamacare-101-What-to-know-if-you-opt-out-of-buying-health-insurance

Jake Horowitz. Health Care 101: The Complete Rundown Of Obamacare You’ve Been Looking For. Policy Mic December 4, 2013. http://www.policymic.com/articles/75475/health-care-101-the-complete-rundown-of-obamacare-you-ve-been-looking-for

Healthcare.gov

HOW TO SIGN UP

Last, but not least, how the heck do you sign up anyway? Officially, you do so at the Healthcare.gov website, but there are ways to do so even if you don’t have access to a computer, or have problems with the website.

Obamacare 101: Seven ways you can sign up, despite Web woes: http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/2013/1022/Obamacare-101-Seven-ways-you-can-sign-up-despite-Web-woes/Pick-up-the-phone

Future Day — Hashtags of the Week (HOTW): (Week of March 3, 2014)

xkcd: Simple Answers

Simple answers to the questions that get asked about every new technology

This past weekend, March 1st, was the second annual celebration of Future Day. As an emerging technologies person, I try to pay attention to this. While the primary hashtag was #FutureDay, there were several others that seemed to pop up along with it, of which some of the more interesting ones included:

#4futr
#futr
#futureday
#FutureOfHealth
#STEAM3
#studentneeds2025

The topics I saw highlighted on Twitter were general views on the future and the future of education. I was able to find content about the future of health, but it took digging and most of the health content was published before the actual event. Next year, I’d love to see more of the health care community organizing events and conversations about the future of health using the official Future Day as a starting point!


Future Day

FUTURE DAY

The ideas were: destroy malaria; drones save lives; coding literacy; virtual assistants; expansion of social networks; iris scanning security; adoption of 3D printing; benefit corporations; integration of self-tracking data in healthcare; data privacy; sensors you swallow; Google Fiber. The wishlist was: testube food; car-free cities; concussion-proof athletics; nuclear fusion; happiness economy; climate solution; high-speed trains; a working tricorder.


Future Day & Science

FUTURE DAY & HEALTH

The ideas were: fecal transplants; “responsive neurostimulator for intractable epilepsy;” Trimethylamine N-oxide; genomic cancer testing; bionic eyes.


Future Day & Education

FUTURE DAY & EDUCATION


First posted at the THL Blog: http://thlibrary.wordpress.com/2014/03/03/future-day-hashtags-of-the-week-hotw-week-of-march-3-2014/

Emerging Technologies in Healthcare: Different Points of View


Emerging Technologies in Healthcare: Different Points of View: http://www.slideshare.net/umhealthscienceslibraries/e-tech-povs

For a staff presentation, reviewing two recent events on the topic of emerging technologies. More detailed information available in these Storify links:

1) Emerging Medicine, Friend or Foe http://storify.com/pfanderson/emerging-technology-in-medicine-friend-or-foe

2) #MedLibs Look at the Horizon Report http://storify.com/pfanderson/medlibs-look-at-the-horizon-report

I loved the talk by Dr. Alex Djuricich for the way in which he both engaged the audience and made a range of new and not so new technologies accessible and relevant for health care providers and students. Of particular interest to me was that Indiana University has been having their folk livetweet Grand Rounds for two years, creating data and analytics for engagement, topics, and more.

The medical librarians conversation really made me proud. They didn’t just sit back and listen to the gurus about tech, but asked hard questions, considered strategies and policies, taking nothing for granted. I was surprised to find how much engagement there was on topics that inspired them, many of which were not included in the actual Horizon Report which we were officially discussing.

Global Metrics for Access & Use of Social Media & Technologies


Global Digital Statistics 2014: Social, Digital & Mobile Around The World (January 2014) http://www.slideshare.net/wearesocialsg/social-digital-mobile-around-the-world-january-2014

Consider this slide deck from We Are Social a reference resource. I know many of the departments recruit students from other parts of the world. This is a great resource to give both a high level overview of how people around the world tend to use various types of technologies, as well as a comparison metrics at the level of individual countries, so you can plan appropriate and respectful strategies for approaching a specific community. Some folk also use this to plan for travel, so they have an idea what resources will be easy to access in a given location.

They also do a lovely job of providing their sources, which are worth repeating here.

* China Internet Network Information Center (CNNIC): http://www1.cnnic.cn/ 32nd Statistical Report on Internet Development: http://www1.cnnic.cn/AU/MediaC/rdxw/hotnews/201307/t20130722_40723.htm
* Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/ Newsroom: http://newsroom.fb.com/ Key Facts: http://newsroom.fb.com/Key-Facts
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU): http://www.itu.int/ Statistics http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/stat/default.aspx
* Internet World Stats: http://www.internetworldstats.com/
* TenCent (China): http://www.tencent.com/en-us/index.shtml
* US CIA: World Factbook: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/ Internet Users: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2153rank.html
* US Census: http://www.census.gov/
* VKontakte (Russia): http://vk.com/club200

On the other hand, sometimes, while searching for links for these, I found other resources that are at least as useful, if not more so. Then I would also stumble on special tools, apps and infographics! Enjoy!

MORE INTERNET STATISTICS

Internet Census 2012: http://internetcensus2012.bitbucket.org/paper.html

Internet Security Census 2013: http://www.fortinet.com/resource_center/survey/internet-security-census-2013-global-survey.html

OpenNet Initiative (Internet Censorship): https://opennet.net/

Social Bakers: Facebook Statistics: http://www.socialbakers.com/facebook-statistics/

W3Techs (Web Technology Surveys): http://w3techs.com/ Technologies: http://w3techs.com/technologies/ Languages Used: http://w3techs.com/technologies/overview/content_language/all

Wikipedia: Global Internet Usage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Internet_usage
NOTE: This one has great graphs.

World Map of Social Networks: http://vincos.it/world-map-of-social-networks/

EXTRAS

US Census Mobile App (dwellr): http://www.census.gov/mobile/

US Census: Data Visualization of the Week: Total Population and Population Missing Due to HIV/AIDS Epidemics: 2012; Selected Countries in Sub-Saharan Africa http://www.census.gov/dataviz/visualizations/062/?intcmp=sldr7

US Census: Infographics Highlight the History and Measurement of Poverty: http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/poverty/cb14-tps02.html

Worldometers: http://www.worldometers.info/

Collecting Thoughts on the FDA vs. 23andMe

Lantern Slides: Heritance of Clefting

I’ve been reading many of the news articles and blogposts about the 23andMe / FDA controversy, and marking interesting points, agreements and disagreements, various perspectives. These are some of my favorite bits from the pieces that have come out so far. I have a distinct personal bias regarding this extremely complicated topic, but also have good friends on “the other side,” as well as having a professional commitment to attempt to be unbiased. In this collection of quotes and highlights, I try to not let my own bias interfere too much, and to fairly represent opinions both pro-FDA and pro-23andMe. Please note that, on both sides, there are extremists, who I found typically didn’t clearly express the complexity of the issues, thus most of the quotes excerpted below are from more moderate authors.


Pic of the Day - PGen
Thoughts on the FDA

“The Food and Drug Administration’s recent directive to the company 23andMe to stop marketing its genetic tests directly to consumers is a shortsighted, heavy-handed, double-standard act of paternalism.”

Marchant, Gary. The FDA Could Set Personal Genetics Rights Back Decades. Slate Nov. 26 2013 12:39 PM. http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2013/11/_23andme_fda_letter_premarket_approval_requirement_could_kill_at_home_genetic.html

“I am deeply frustrated by the simplistic narrative of OMG FDA BIG GUBBERMINT SILENCING DARING ENTREPRENEUR. It’s not that simple.”

Wilbanks, John. FDA’s Culture Is Mendelian Dominant Over 23andme’s Business Model. DEL-FI November 30, 2013. http://del-fi.org/post/68560843111/fdas-culture-is-mendelian-dominant-over-23andmes

“The outrage over the FDA’s treatment of 23andMe is the wrong response. We should be holding 23andMe accountable for the claims they make in marketing their product. Even a product with such great potential should have to support its claims with valid evidence.”

Curtiss, Chase. Here’s what health entrepreneurs can learn from 23andMe. The Verge Beat November 29, 2013 5:11 PM. http://venturebeat.com/2013/11/29/heres-what-health-entrepreneurs-can-learn-from-23andme/

“This incident highlights the tension between the paternalistic medical establishment that arose to deal with the dangers of 19th-century quack medicine, and a “techno-populist” element of American society pioneering personal health assessment and decision-making by leveraging new information technologies.”

Khan, Razib. The FDA’s Battle With 23andMe Won’t Mean Anything in the Long Run. Slate Nov. 25 2013 2:46 PM. http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/11/25/fda_letter_to_23andme_won_t_mean_anything_in_the_long_run.html

“If the F.D.A. indeed insists on making 23andMe prove beyond doubt the validity of every single correlation, no genetic-testing service will be able to economically deliver medically relevant genetic information directly to consumers. It will destroy the industry and leave medical genetics in the hands of a medical establishment that has already failed to give people an easy way to obtain and use the elemental information in their own spit.”

Dobbs, David. The F.D.A. vs. Personal Genetic Testing. New Yorker November 27, 2013. http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/11/the-fda-vs-personal-genetic-testing.html

“Years ago, the FDA used the same argument against selling blood glucose meters to patients with diabetes. I believe that the FDA is wrong in saying that data in the hands of patients will do damage.”

Bartlett, Ann. Genetic Testing and the FDA. Health Central Wednesday, November 27, 2013. http://www.healthcentral.com/diabetes/c/9993/164554/genetic-testing-fda?ap=2008

“FDA acted properly in view of 23andMe’s cavalier attitude toward its regulatory obligations and its failure to meet past commitments. However, it would be a setback for science if 23andMe were not allowed to proceed. For its research model to deliver, it needs more people, far more people in its database. A campaign to sign up a million customers is a good start, and not losing momentum is essential. Perhaps 23andMe and FDA can find an accommodation — such as a consent order — that allows 23andMe to move forward while catching up on its overdue obligations, under threat of financial penalties or even perhaps the licensing of its database.”

Munos, Bernard. 23andMe: A Fumbling Gene In Its Corporate DNA? Forbes 11/29/2013 @ 10:19AM. http://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmunos/2013/11/29/23andme-a-fumbling-gene-in-its-corporate-dna/

“It reads like the letter of a jilted lover,” Misha Angrist, a former genetic counsellor who writes about personal genomics and teaches at Duke University, said. “ ‘We went on fourteen dates! We exchanged all these e-mails! We held hands in the park! Now you’re telling me, “F*** you,” and kicking me to the curb.’ ”

Dobbs, David. The F.D.A. vs. Personal Genetic Testing. New Yorker November 27, 2013. http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/11/the-fda-vs-personal-genetic-testing.html

“Though the FDA talks up progress, there is a risk that it may slow it down. The agency is weighing regulations on test kits sold directly to consumers, laboratory tests and software that analyses raw genetic data. It is clear that 23andMe is not the only testing firm in its sights.”

And the FDA: A regulator brings a genetics company to a halt. Economist Nov 30th 2013. http://www.economist.com/news/business/21590941-regulator-brings-genetics-company-halt-and-fda

“Is the FDA and the rest of the medical establishment too conservative about innovation and health data that consumers can get directly? Well… is the Pope Catholic?”

MacManus, Richard. Thoughts On 23andMe & The FDA. November 27, 2013. http://ricm.ac/2013/11/27/thoughts-on-23andme-the-fda/

“I asked Dr. Hamburg if she were to have any power that FDA currently lacks, what would it be? The central thesis of her reply was: “I also think we need to find a way – maybe it’s just completely unrealistic – where we can have more flexibility in the system so that every time there’s a crisis or a recognition of a need to do more…we don’t have to go through the process of seeking new legislation.””

Kroll, David. Why The FDA Can’t Be Flexible With 23andMe, By Law. Forbes 11/28/2013 @ 8:45AM. http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidkroll/2013/11/28/why-the-fda-cant-be-flexible-with-23andme-by-law/


PGEN, Take 2
Thoughts about 23andMe

“Either 23andMe is deliberately trying to force a battle with the FDA, which I think would potentially win points for the movement the company represents but kill the company itself, or it is simply guilty of the single dumbest regulatory strategy I have seen in 13 years of covering the Food and Drug Administration.”

Herper, Matthew. 23andStupid: Is 23andMe Self-Destructing? Forbes 11/25/2013 @ 3:51PM. http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2013/11/25/23andstupid-is-23andme-self-destructing/

“On the Twitterz, I wrote that 23andMe’s attorneys should be disbarred for letting things reach this point. Interestingly, it appears that General Counsel left the company several weeks ago (and no replacement has been found). I’m not always a big fan of the FDA (they still haven’t really figured out how to approve new antibiotics), but the reality is that the FDA is like those humongous tractors used to move space rockets: they’re slow, but crush everything in their path. You can’t bullshit these guys–they just keep coming.”

Mike. Some Thoughts on the FDA Action Against 23andMe.com. Mike the Mad Biologist November 26, 2013. http://mikethemadbiologist.com/2013/11/26/some-thoughts-on-the-fda-action-against-23andme-com/

“The consequences of mistakes by 23andMe can be deadly serious. If it reports a “false positive” for a major disease, that can alter someone’s whole life (though I’m rather sure that any medical professional would obtain results from another service to confirm positive results).”

Khan, Razib. The FDA’s Battle With 23andMe Won’t Mean Anything in the Long Run. Slate Nov. 25 2013 2:46 PM. http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/11/25/fda_letter_to_23andme_won_t_mean_anything_in_the_long_run.html

“But as the FDA frets about the accuracy of 23andMe’s tests, it is missing their true function, and consequently the agency has no clue about the real dangers they pose. The Personal Genome Service isn’t primarily intended to be a medical device. It is a mechanism meant to be a front end for a massive information-gathering operation against an unwitting public.”

Seife, Charles. 23andMe Is Terrifying, But Not for the Reasons the FDA Thinks. Scientific American November 27, 2013. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=23andme-is-terrifying-but-not-for-reasons-fda

“Some experts claim that the risk of ailments like Type 2 diabetes can only be partially calculated based on genetic information. A credible diagnosis would require understanding a lot more about the person’s lifestyle and health history. Promoting a do-it-yourself culture when talking about serious health concerns like cancer and heart disease might have major downsides. However, the opinion in favor of 23andMe is that a dangerous double standard is at work. Today a doctor can sell many types of genetic tests to a patient, at a much higher cost. Only a few have received FDA approval. So why penalize the direct-to-consumer model?”

Kaushik, Preetam. FDA vs. 23andMe: The DNA of a disagreement. All Voices Nov 29, 2013 at 8:35 PM PST. http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/16062954-fda-vs-23andme-the-dna-of-a-disagreement

“However, according to one expert, the accuracy of the test is not the biggest issue. The company’s testing methods have been found to meet federal standards for lab testing, called Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA), said Amy Sturm, a genetic counselor at The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center. A greater problem is that the results provide “a very incomplete view” of a person’s risk for a given disease, Sturm said.”

Rettner, Rachel. 23andMe: What’s Really Wrong with Personal Genetic Tests. November 26, 2013 01:55pm ET. http://www.livescience.com/41534-23andme-direct-to-consumer-genetic-test-shortcomings.html

“Unfortunately, due to all the complex interactions between the markers, this full unravelling is impossible. The number of interactions is probably so high that every patient will have his or her own unique complex cause of disease. And what has never happened cannot be identified or predicted by big data. Advances in genome science will improve what tests offer, but these improvements will be small. While the hope is based on big data, the reality is that most diseases are simply not genetic enough. Other risk factors such as diet, body weight, smoking, exercise and stress are too important. And big data cannot change the biology of diseases – it will not make them more genetic.”

Janssens, Cecile. It is game over for 23andMe, and rightly so. Pando Daily November 27, 2013. http://pando.com/2013/11/27/it-is-game-over-for-23andme-and-rightly-so/

“It’s not all 23andMe’s fault. In my book research, I’ve read a lot about personal genomics. And the more I read up on genetics, epigenetics, etc., the more I see that the scientific community still has very little clue about what actually causes disease.”

MacManus, Richard. Thoughts On 23andMe & The FDA. November 27, 2013. http://ricm.ac/2013/11/27/thoughts-on-23andme-the-fda/

“THAT is the future. The DTC SNP chip era is ending. 23andMe’s two main competitors, Navigenics and deCODEme, already left the market. 23andMe’s SNP chips are slipping rapidly into the past. And 23andMe knows it.”

Greely, Hank. The FDA Drops an Anvil on 23andMe – Now What? Stanford Law School Blog November 25, 2013 http://blogs.law.stanford.edu/lawandbiosciences/2013/11/25/the-fda-drops-an-anvil-on-23andme-%E2%80%93-now-what/

“As to what will happen now is actually very simple. 23&Me will have to either file as a diagnostic and go through medical approval (which will cost millions of dollars) or start to only offer their service through a medical practitioner, more than likely through a clinical geneticist that can walk a patient through the intricacies of genetics and disease. The problem though is that according to the US News, there are only 358 clinical geneticists currently practicing in the United States. Measure the knowledge dissemination of a clinical geneticist, who usually only sees patients through referral, to the marketing power of a Google backed company like 23&Me, that was gearing up for a television marketing campaign: the outcome is a nail in the proverbial coffin for recreational genomics. As for 23&Me, its problems will only worsen as it will struggle to validate itself through the FDA since genomics is still in its infancy, thus: RIP the only viable, scalable consumer genetics company in the world.”

Pablo, Juan. What is next for Direct to Consumer Genetics. 1EQ Nov. 27, 2013. http://1eq.me/blog/?p=182

“We’re ignoring the bigger issue! The real reason 23andMe can’t test for my mutation is the company who formerly held a patent on BRCA1 and BRCA2 still has a proprietary database of our genetic mutations, and they aren’t sharing it with anyone! We need to fix THIS. We need for the government to help us figure out how data can be shared rather than be treated as a trade secret.”

Andrea. FDA B*tchslap of 23andMe: A BRCA Previvor’s Perspective. Brave Bosom November 26, 2013. http://www.bravebosom.com/fda-btchslap-of-23andme-a-brca-previvors-perspective/

“23andMe is simply doing what the Internet does best: forcing old dogs to learn new tricks. That’s what the fight between Uber and taxicab commissions is about. Same for AirBnB and hotel regulators. The only profession slower to change how they do things than doctors is bureaucrats. So the FDA’s reaction is understandable — but misguided.”

Szoka, Berin. FDA Just Banned 23andMe’s DNA Testing Kits, and Users Are Fighting Back. Huffington Post 11/26/2013 7:46 pm. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/berin-szoka/fda-just-banned-23andmes-_b_4339182.html


23andMe Celiac Disease Risk Markers
Thoughts about Regulation of Personal Genetic/Genomic Services

“We need DTC screening. It helped me. It’ll help many others. But until the FDA learns how to deal with Bayes’s rule and its discomforts – and until DTC companies figure out a business model that isn’t based on massive loss leadership – we’re going to keep coming back to this clash of culture and business models. Both sides need to make some changes if we’re going to avoid doing this over, and over, and over.”

Wilbanks, John. FDA’s Culture Is Mendelian Dominant Over 23andme’s Business Model. DEL-FI November 30, 2013. http://del-fi.org/post/68560843111/fdas-culture-is-mendelian-dominant-over-23andmes

“23andMe embodies a generation preoccupied with itself. Our right to know has superseded our ability to understand. Empowerment has evolved as data, information, knowledge and wisdom are almost seen as one in the same. Whether 23andMe’s reporting is actionable is to miss the point. When you’ve got your data, what more do you need, really? Epigenetics…what epigenetics?”

Vartabedian, Bryan. 23andMe – Why Our Big Government is Right. 33 Charts November 28, 2013. http://33charts.com/2013/11/23andme-government-is-right.html

“As a citizen, I expect corporate transparency for any new health product. As a patient, I think the risks of taking the test outweigh the benefits for my health. As a doctor, I have my concerns for people with distress or misinformation from results of an unproven genomic test. As a human being, I worry about misuse and unintended social consequences of our genetic heritage.”

Matthew Katz on 23andMe: “Return to Sender, Genome Unknown: Seven Reasons I Will Return My Personal Genome Kit.” e-patients.net December 3, 2013. http://e-patients.net/archives/2013/12/matthew-katz-on-23andme-return-to-sender-genome-unknown-seven-reasons-i-will-return-my-personal-genome-kit.html#!

“Our society has increasing information and public access to information. While it is difficult for me to think that this isn’t a good thing overall, we have to thoughtfully consider the possible unintended negative consequences. This case is part of a larger pattern of sacrificing quality-control filters for the sake of open access. This increasingly puts the burden on the public to make sense of sometimes complex and technical information. Everyone, now, can be their own geneticist.”

Novella, Steven. The FDA and Personalized Genetic Testing. Science Based Medicine November 27, 2013. http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/the_fda_and_personalized_genetic_testing/

“Community forums and news sites across the web exploded with debate, with most people rallying to 23andMe’s defense. The company’s ample support-base claims that the Food and Drug Administration is over-regulating, and is stifling innovation. However, the majority of geneticists and medical professionals I’ve spoke with have sided with the Food and Drug Administration, arguing that many patients require genetic counseling after receiving DNA test results that point to a high risk of cancer and other life-threatening conditions.”

Farr, Christina. Here’s why the FDA is targeting 23andMe. MedCityNews November 26, 2013 10:00 am http://medcitynews.com/2013/11/heres-fda-targeting-23andme/

“When 23andMe sent us our results, we followed their advice: we asked our doctor to talk about them. Most doctors didn’t know where to begin. But the more of us ask about 23andMe, the more the medical profession is catching up. Slowly but surely, they’re brushing up on genomics, taking the time to understand the site, and talking to us about our results and what, if anything, to do about them.”

Szoka, Berin. FDA Just Banned 23andMe’s DNA Testing Kits, and Users Are Fighting Back. Huffington Post 11/26/2013 7:46 pm. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/berin-szoka/fda-just-banned-23andmes-_b_4339182.html

“If you scare somebody into believing they’re high risk, they could take actions that hurt their health,” says Gutierrez. Not only is the data on some genetic links inconclusive, he adds, it’s well-chronicled that patients can push their doctors into authorizing unnecessary procedures. “Doctors do a lot of double mastectomies because of fear.”

Brady, Diane. Do Genetic Tests Need Doctors? FDA Defends Its Challenge to 23andMe. Business Week November 27, 2013. http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-11-27/do-genetic-tests-need-doctors-fda-defends-its-challenge-to-23andme#r=hp-lst

“Should this third party be a doctor, as some (mostly doctors) are arguing? There are certainly doctors out there who have a great grasp of human genetics. But there aren’t a lot of them. And even the doctors who do know the world of human genetics inside and out aren’t in a position to help people navigate every nook and cranny of their genome. This is a job for software, not for people.”

Eisen, Michael. FDA vs. 23andMe: How do we want genetic testing to be regulated? November 26, 2013. http://www.michaeleisen.org/blog/?p=1480

“This is a broad cautionary tale,” says Quackenbush. “We need to be careful about how we define phenotypes, such as whether a patient is likely to respond to a drug or have an adverse event, because if we don’t do it well, we’re not going to have good tools for advancing personalized medicine.”

Hayden, Erika Check. Personalized cancer treatments suffer setback. NATURE 27 November 2013. http://www.nature.com/news/personalized-cancer-treatments-suffer-setback-1.14238


OTHER COLLECTIONS

Alexander, Lindsey. Six smart takes on the 23andMe FDA standoff. MedCityNews November 27, 2013 11:58 am. http://medcitynews.com/2013/11/smart-takes-23andme-fda-standoff/

Dobbs, David. I Got Your 23andMe – FDA Food Fight Links Right Here. Neuron Culture November 30, 2013. http://daviddobbs.net/smoothpebbles/i-got-your-23andme-v-fda-links-right-here/